Maybe this could solve your problem: Just add \n in the string you want
to display:
printf("Please give N= \n");
Of course, this will return, but the string is displayed. This run by me
without the fflush().
On the other hand, do you really observe that the time of the scanf ()
and the time to enter "N" be insignificant ?
Pascal
Meilin Bai a écrit :
So it means that MPI doesn't suit to interactive programming? Though
we can really use fflush(stdout) to get the right order, it takes too
more time, and it's said that using fflush() is not a good progrmming
style in C.
On the other hand, in Fortran language, this situation won't exist.
Maybe it is because I/O implement is a built-in part of Fortran, while
in C/C++ it is realized only through function like scanf, printf, et al?
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Prentice Bisbal <prent...@ias.edu
<mailto:prent...@ias.edu>> wrote:
On 03/29/2011 01:29 PM, Meilin Bai wrote:
> Dear open-mpi users:
>
> I come across a little problem when running a MPI C program compiled
> with Open MPI 1.4.3. A part of codes as follows:
>
> MPI_Init(&argc, &argv);
> MPI_Comm_size(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &numprocs);
> MPI_Comm_rank(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &myid);
> MPI_Get_processor_name(processor_name, &namelen);
> if (myid == 0) {
> printf("Please give N= ");
> //fflush(stdout);
> scanf("%d", &n);
> startwtime = MPI_Wtime();
> }
>
> If comment out the sentence of "fflush(stdout);", it doesn't
print out
> the message till I input an integer n. And if I add the fflush
function
> between them, it works as expected, though comsumming time
obviously.
>
> However, when I compiled it with Mpich2-1.3.2p1, without fflush
function
> in the code, it works correctly.
>
> Can anyone know what the matter is.
>
The Open MPI Developers (Jeff, Ralph, etc) can confirm this:
The MPI standard doesn't have a lot of strict requirements for I/O
behavior like this, so implementations are allowed to buffer I/O
if they
want. There is nothing wrong with requiring fflush(stdout) in order to
get the behavior you want. In fact, if you check some text books
on MPI
programming, I'm pretty sure they recommend using fflush to minimize
this problem.
MPICH behaves differently because its developers made different design
choices.
Neither behavior is "wrong".
--
Prentice
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
us...@open-mpi.org <mailto:us...@open-mpi.org>
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
--
Meilin Bai
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
us...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
